Re: [LAU] Reply to

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <t_w_@...>
Cc: <linux-audio-user@...>
Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 - 6:29 am

On 09/08/2011, Thorsten Wilms wrote:

Same place as reply-to gets it, I should imagine. (I can't shake the
feeling that you didn't think this question through.)

> Oh, and receiving mail with both a list and my address in recipients as

Oh. So my broken client is a problem that mustn't be worked around in
order to force a change, but your broken client is something that must
always be catered for by everyone else? There's a word for that kind
of thinking.

On the other hand, perhaps I shouldn't expect logic from someone who
attacks the one bit of a critical email which is basically in
agreement with them...
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[LAU] Reply to, Goran Mekic, (Tue Aug 9, 1:12 pm)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Thorsten Wilms, (Tue Aug 9, 1:52 pm)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, S. Massy, (Wed Aug 10, 3:18 am)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, david, (Wed Aug 10, 6:45 am)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Gwenhwyfaer, (Tue Aug 9, 7:50 pm)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, david, (Wed Aug 10, 6:40 am)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Thorsten Wilms, (Tue Aug 9, 8:13 pm)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Gwenhwyfaer, (Wed Aug 10, 6:29 am)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Thorsten Wilms, (Wed Aug 10, 6:49 am)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Joe Hartley, (Tue Aug 9, 8:22 pm)
Re: [LAU] Reply to, Julien Claassen, (Tue Aug 9, 1:21 pm)